Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Law Of The Sea-Submerged Lands-A State Must Exercise Substantial, Continuous, And Recognized Authority To Establish A Body Of Water As A Historic Bay, Sarah Melissa Stebbins

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Proportional Fault In Maritime Collisions-Charting The New Course, Gustave R. Dubus Iii

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Louis Brandeis’S Vision Of Light And Justice As Articulated On The Side Of A Coffee Mug, Randy Lee

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Of The United States, October Term 2017 Preview, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute

Supreme Court Overviews

No abstract provided.

Leidos And The Roberts Court's Improvident Securities Law Docket, Matthew C. Turk, Karen E. Woody

Scholarly Articles

For its October 2017 term, the U.S. Supreme Court took up a noteworthy securities law case, Leidos, Inc. v. Indiana Public Retirement System. The legal question presented in Leidos was whether a failure to comply with a regulation issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Item 303 of Regulation S-K (Item 303), can be grounds for a securities fraud claim pursuant to Rule 10b-5 and the related Section 10(b) of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act. Leidos teed up a significant set of issues because Item 303 concerns one of the more controversial corporate disclosures mandated by the SEC—an …

The Disparate Impact Canon, Michael T. Morley

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Hitting The "Bullseye" In Supreme Court Coverage: News Quality In The Court's 2014 Term, Michael A. Zilis, Justin Wedeking, Alexander Denison

Political Science Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Fourth Amendment Categorical Imperative, David Gray

Michigan Law Review Online

The vast majority of current Fourth Amendment doctrine is unfounded, incoherent, and dangerous. The culprit is the Supreme Court’s 1967 decision in Katz v. United States, which defines “search” as government conduct that violates subjectively manifested expectations of privacy “that society is prepared to recognize as ‘reasonable.’ ” This is pure applesauce. Nowhere will you find a standard dictionary that defines “search” in these terms. Neither will you hear a native speaker of the English language use “search” in this sense unless her mind has been polluted by a semester of studying criminal procedure. The Court created this definition …

Lafler V. Cooper's Remedy: A Weak Response To A Constitutional Violation, Matthew T. Ciulla

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The Lafler v. Cooper Court should have chosen the remedy of specific performance of the original plea bargain. The specific performance remedy, long implemented by federal courts in Lafler-like scenarios, and ordered by the district court in Lafler, precisely cures the Lafler injury—the accused regains the ability to accept the original plea offer, except he now has the benefit of effective assistance of counsel. The specific performance remedy, when coupled with the safeguards of the Strickland prongs, poses little risk of abuse, and gives heft to the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of effective assistance of counsel in the plea …

Marriage Equality: The Paralleled Progress Between Public Approval And Supreme Court Decisionmaking, Riley Erin Fredrick

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Measuring A Civil-Discovery Sanction For Failure To Turn Over Requested Material: Goodyear Tire V. Haeger (15-1406), Doug Rendleman

Scholarly Articles

A sanction that is unrelated to misconduct is criminal and requires criminal instead of civil procedure. In a product liability lawsuit, the respondent, Goodyear, failed to turn over important tests before the parties settled. The petitioners, the Haegers—a couple who alleged Goodyear’s tires caused injuries—sought approval of a sanction based on their attorney fees. Complex and technical civil procedural rules and statutes, contempt, and the court’s inherent power will govern the Supreme Court’s decision. The issue before the Court is the specificity of the causal link between Goodyear’s misconduct and the amount of the civil sanction.

The Nondischargeability Of Government Cleanup Orders, Christina Mavrikis

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

One of the primary purposes of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) is to provide debtors with a financial fresh start. Upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition by or against the debtor, section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that all entities are barred from actions to collect, assess, or recover any pre-petition claims against the debtor. In general, the automatic stay serves to halt any pending legal proceedings against the debtor so that the pre-petition claims can be managed and discharged by the bankruptcy court. There are, however, exceptions to the automatic stay. …

Data Breaches, Identity Theft, And Article Iii Standing: Will The Supreme Court Resolve The Split In The Circuits?, Bradford C. Mank

Notre Dame Law Review

In data breach cases, the plaintiff typically alleges that the defendant used inadequate computer security to protect the plaintiff’s personal data. In most, but not all cases, the plaintiff cannot prove that a hacker or thief has actually used or sold the data to the plaintiff’s detriment. In most cases, a plaintiff alleges that the defendant’s failure to protect his personal data has caused him damages by increasing his risk of suffering actual identity theft in the future and therefore imposed costs on the plaintiff when he reasonably takes measures to prevent future unauthorized third-party data access by purchasing credit …

We "Kent" Keep Transferring Kids Without A Hearing: Using Recent Supreme Court Jurisprudence To Revive Kent V. United States And End Mandatory Transfer For Juveniles, Summer Woods

Criminal Law Practitioner

No abstract provided.

"[R]Elegated Through No Fault Of Their Own To A More Difficult" System: Applying The Obergefell Opinion To Custody Principles, Melanie Kalmanson

The Modern American

No abstract provided.

Navigating The Rubicon: Constitutionalism And The Inevitability Of The Social Contract, 51 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (2017), Lillian M. Spiess

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Departmentalism: An Introduction, Kevin C. Walsh

Scholarly Articles

This Article introduces the idea of judicial departmentalism and argues for its superiority to judicial supremacy. Judicial supremacy is the idea that the Constitution means for everybody what the Supreme Court says it means in deciding a case. Judicial departmentalism, by contrast, is the idea that the Constitution means in the judicial department what the Supreme Court says it means in deciding a case. Within the judicial department, the law of judgments, the law of remedies, and the law of precedent combine to enable resolutions by the judicial department to achieve certain kinds of settlements. Judicial departmentalism holds that these …

The Institutional Case For Partisan Gerrymandering Claims, G. Michael Parsons

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

For voters hoping the Supreme Court’s 2017 Term brings relief from partisan gerrymandering, the end of the 2016 Term was inauspicious. In Cooper v. Harris, the majority assumed the legitimacy of “partisan advantage” arguments while the dissent—including Justice Kennedy—warned about the “serious institutional and federalism implications” of judicial intervention in the redistricting process. If past is prologue, this concern for institutional and structural interests does not bode well.

Carpenter V. United States: Brief Of Scholars Of Criminal Procedure And Privacy As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Andrew Ferguson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Amici curiae are forty-two scholars engaged in significant research and/or teaching on criminal procedure and privacy law. This brief addresses issues that are within amici’s particular areas of scholarly expertise. They have a shared interest in clarifying the law of privacy in the digital era, and believe that a review of scholarly literature on the topic is helpful to answering the question in this case. This brief is co-authored by Harry Sandick, Kathrina Szymborski, & Jared Buszin of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP.Carpenter v. United States presents an opportunity to reconsider the Fourth Amendment in the digital age. Cell …

Finally, A True Elements Test: Mathis V. United States And The Categorical Approach, Rebecca Sharpless

Brooklyn Law Review

The fate of defendants facing lengthy federal sentence enhancements often turns on what the U.S. Supreme Court calls the categorical approach. The approach controls whether a federal defendant might face an additional decade or longer in prison based solely on having prior convictions of a certain type. At a time when many question the wisdom of mass incarceration, the Court has taken great care to delimit the circumstances in which a federal sentencing judge can lengthen sentences based on recidivism. The categorical approach also governs most immigration cases involving deportation for a crime. As Congress has cut back deportation defenses …